Local
Choi trial halted after challenge to judge’s ruling
Preliminary evidence shows ‘vindictive prosecution’
Former Army Lt. Dan Choi and 12 others were arrested last year after protesting ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ at the White House. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
A federal judge on Wednesday suspended the trial of gay former Army Lt. Dan Choi after the prosecutor said she would challenge his preliminary finding that sufficient evidence exists that Choi was targeted for “vindictive prosecution” in connection with a White House protest last November.
Choi and 12 other activists were arrested Nov. 15 for handcuffing themselves to the White House fence to protest the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law. Choi faces a possible sentence of six months in jail or a $5,000 fine if convicted on a misdemeanor charge of disobeying a lawful order to disperse from the fence.
In a tense exchange between U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge John Facciola, prosecutor Angela George announced she would file a request for a writ of mandamus or legal challenge before the court’s chief judge to contest Facciola’s decision to allow Choi’s attorneys to pursue a vindictive prosecution defense.
Facciola responded by saying he would suspend the trial for 10 days to give George, an assistant U.S. Attorney, time to prepare a motion for a writ of mandamus and to provide Chief Judge Royce Lamberth time to consider it.
William Miller, a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s office, confirmed that George would seek the writ of mandamus from Lamberth. But he declined to comment further on the matter, saying his office never comments on pending cases.
If Lamberth grants the request, legal observers say Facciola would likely be directed not to allow Choi’s attorneys to pursue a vindictive prosecution defense. Should he turn down the request, Facciola would be free to allow the vindictive prosecution defense to move forward.
Such a defense would allow Choi’s attorneys to pursue documents and subpoena witnesses that Choi’s supporters say could possibly link the alleged effort to go after Choi for a harsher prosecution to higher-level government officials, including officials at the White House.
Defense attorney Robert Feldman called Facciola’s finding that the defense presented a “prima facie case” that a vindictive prosecution occurred a “vindication” of Choi’s longstanding contention that his arrest and prosecution violated his constitutional right to free speech.
The clash between George and Facciola came on the third day of the trial and one day after Choi testified for more than two hours as the lead witness for his own defense, saying he was exercising his First Amendment right to free speech at the White House protest.
In response to Feldman’s questions, Choi testified at length about his role as a civil rights activist for LGBT people and for gays in the military. He told how he models his actions on the black civil rights movement of the 1960s, including the famous lunch counter sit-ins at a Woolworth’s department store in Greensboro, N.C., that challenged segregation laws.
Choi testified that a series of three White House protests against the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law on gays in the military, in which he and other activists were arrested at the White House fence, were based on the same principle used in the black civil rights movement for exercising a constitutional right of free speech.
“I believe that was a transformative moment,” he said of the White House protests.
George objected repeatedly to Choi’s dialogue on civil rights, saying it was not relevant to the case at hand. To the amazement of some courtroom observers, Facciola overruled her objections almost every time she raised them.
In her cross-examination of Choi, George pressed the former Army officer, West Point graduate and combat veteran in the Iraq war to respond to the charge that he disobeyed a lawful order to disperse from the White House fence.
Choi responded by citing a provision in U.S. military law pertaining to unlawful orders.
“If you are given an order that is unlawful or immoral, it is your duty to disobey that order,” he said.
Feldman and defense co-counsel Norman Kent told reporters covering the trial that Choi’s defense is based, in part, on the premise that prosecutors singled him out for a harsher prosecution when they charged him with violating a federal regulation pertaining to White House protests and demonstrations along the White House fence and sidewalk.
The federal regulation carries a penalty of six months in jail and a possible $5,000 fine. The two attorneys said people arrested in virtually all other White House demonstrations in recent memory – including Choi and other activists in similar protests in April and May of 2010 – were charged under a D.C. municipal ordinance they compare to a traffic violation that carries no prison sentence.
In his testimony on Tuesday, Choi said he believes prosecutors decided to invoke the far more harsh federal regulation against him in the Nov. 15, 2010 case, which he now faces at trial, because of his role as a gay former military officer who is “standing up for my beliefs.”
Choi stated in his testimony that thousands of people appeared to have violated the same regulation with which he was charged when they gathered at the White House earlier this year to celebrate President Barack Obama’s announcement that accused terrorist Osama bin Laden had been killed in a U.S. military operation in Pakistan.
Choi and his attorneys noted that dozens of the revelers that evening clung to the White House fence and did not move back and forth along the sidewalk, as required under the ordinance for a demonstration, when they cheered and expressed support for the president’s role in bin Laden’s capture and death.
By not attempting to disperse or arrest the throngs that congregated at the fence on that occasion while they arrested Choi and other protesters for challenging Obama on his handling of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law shows that Choi was singled out for “vindictive” prosecution, Choi’s attorneys argue.
Choi and his attorneys also argue that the ordinance that Park Police used to arrest Choi violates the 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham. The decision overturned a Birmingham, Ala., law used by police there to arrest a civil rights protester in 1963 for demonstrating without a permit on grounds that the law was used to stifle his constitutional right to peacefully parade in a civil rights protest.
In anticipation of Choi’s vindictive prosecution defense, the government filed a motion last Sunday, one day before the trial opened, arguing that rules established by previous court decisions require a vindictive or “selective” prosecution defense to be introduced prior to the start of a trial. The 14-page motion argues that such a defense cannot be introduced during a trial and that Choi’s defense team failed to introduce the defense before the trial started.
Facciola did not rule on the motion at the start of the trial, saying he would do so as the trial progressed to first determine whether Choi’s attorneys would move forward with that defense.
When questioned by George during the trial on Wednesday, Facciola said he chose to reject the government motion on grounds that prior decisions by appeals courts requiring a vindictive or selective defense to be introduced prior to trial applied only to jury trials.
Choi’s case moved forward as a non-jury trial similar to other misdemeanor cases involving alleged violation of regulations pertaining to protest demonstrations at the White House.
George’s announcement about the writ of mandamus came after Facciola appeared to side with arguments by the defense that the government singled out Choi for a harsher prosecution for his Nov. 15, 2010 White House protest.
They attracted national media attention when Choi and 12 other LGBT activists handcuffed themselves to the White House fence. About 75 supporters who assembled across the street in Lafayette Park cheered and chanted slogans for LGBT equality while Park Police removed the handcuffs with bolt cutters and placed Choi and the other protesters under arrest.
In May of this year, the 12 others who were arrested agreed to a government offer to plead guilty to the charge in exchange for the government dismissing the case against them in six months if the activists don’t get arrested during that period for any reason, including a similar civil disobedience protest.
Choi told reporters at a news conference outside the federal courthouse Monday, after the trial recessed for the day, that he rejected the government’s plea bargain offer because he believes the law and regulation used to arrest him is unconstitutional.
“I believe there is no law that, in the history of this country, abridges freedom of speech, assembly, or the right to protest for redress of grievances, which were clear and made plain by all of the defendants,” he said.
George called five Park Police officers and a U.S. Park Ranger as government witnesses on Monday. Under questioning from George, they testified that they had no intention of singling out the protesters for their political beliefs or because of their sexual orientation.
In his cross-examination of the officers, Feldman questioned the validity of their decision to charge Choi under the federal regulation rather than the less serious D.C. municipal statute.
Feldman released an e-mail sent to the defense on Friday by George that extended another offer for Choi to plead guilty to the charge in exchange for the dismissal of the case by the government if Choi refrained from getting arrested for the next four months.
Feldman said Choi responded by saying he would accept the offer only on condition that the government issue a public apology to Choi in court on Monday for the arrest and prosecution against him. Feldman said the government rejected the conditions, prompting Choi to turn down the offer.
A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s office said the office would have no comment on the case while the trial is in progress.
Park Police Lt. Robert Lachance, who led a team of officers assigned to arrest the protesters, testified that an assistant solicitor general at the Department of Interior, which has jurisdiction over the Park Police, advised him that the act of chaining oneself to the White House fence violated a federal regulation against actions that pose a threat to public safety, obstruct traffic, and potentially prevent “emergency responders” from carrying out their work.
At the news conference, Feldman said he planned to argue at the trial that Choi’s action at the White House fence did not violate the regulation and statute cited by the Park Police and by prosecutor George.
“It’s uncontroverted that Lt. Choi is no threat to the public safety whatsoever,” said Feldman. “Neither does he obstruct traffic, which is the second part of the regulation.”
Feldman said he would also argue that the regulation used by authorities to arrest Choi applies only to the sidewalk next to the White House fence. He noted that Choi and the other protesters were standing on a masonry ledge that rises above the sidewalk and serves as an anchor for the White House fence.
“It’s very clear that my client was never on the sidewalk,” Feldman said. “He was on the masonry fence, which is above the sidewalk. And the warnings from Lt. Lachance said, ‘Get off the sidewalk.’ How can you get off the sidewalk if you were never on the sidewalk?”
He said he would also argue that Choi was unable to hear the warning that Lachance made to the protesters through a loudspeaker brought to the scene by Park Police. Lachance testified that he read a scripted message three times ordering the protesters to leave the fence and warning them they would be arrested if they did not comply with that order.
Feldman said Lachance’s warnings were drowned out by loud shouts and chants by Choi and the other 12 protesters handcuffed to the fence as well as by dozens of other protesters assembled in Lafayette Park.
The chants and shouts could be heard in a video recording of the protest that George played in the courtroom as part of a prosecution exhibit for the trial.
“There’s a cacophony of noise all around, and how can you possibly hear Lt. Lachance’s warnings to go away?” Feldman said at the news conference.
Gay activist and former military Capt. Jim Pietrangelo II testified on Tuesday as a defense witness, saying he observed first-hand what he believes were attempts by Park Police and government officials overseeing the police action an effort to single Choi out for a harsher charge based on Choi’s statutes as a gay former military officer and advocate for gays in the military.
Delaware
Gay man sues Delaware AG for not prosecuting partner in domestic violence case
Also accuses Univ. of Delaware of failing to discipline Ph.D. student named as attacker
Tymothy ‘Ty’ Moyer, a gay former resident of Wilmington, Del., earlier this year filed a lawsuit in federal court charging Delaware Attorney General Kathleen ‘Kathy’ Jennings, one of her deputies, and a state-employed victims advocate with conspiring to deny him “equal protection” under the law because he is African American by declining to prosecute his then domestic partner after the partner’s arrest on Feb. 3, 2024, for assaulting and seriously injuring him, causing a “permanent traumatic brain injury.”
The lawsuit also names as defendants the University of Delaware and one of its officials for allegedly failing to sufficiently discipline Michael Uzu, Moyer’s former partner and alleged attacker, who at the time was a graduate student seeking a Ph.D. in chemistry.
According to the lawsuit, following his arrest on an assault charge, the university conducted an investigation of Uzu and found he violated the university’s policy of student conduct by engaging in domestic violence, but issued a deferred suspension until December 2025, allowing him to continue his studies. Moyer has said the university acted improperly by not expelling Uzu from its Ph.D. program because of the seriousness of the assault.
The lawsuit identifies Uzu, 33, as a citizen of Nigeria with a U.S. student visa. Uzu identifies himself on his LinkedIn page as a chemist who was conducting research for the Delaware-based chemical company Chemours while studying advanced chemistry at the University of Delaware. His LinkedIn page says he received his Ph.D. in 2026.
Moyer, 30, who identifies himself in his lawsuit as African American and a lifelong U.S. citizen, provided the Washington Blade with a statement describing the details of his allegations against Uzu.
“On the late evening of February 2 through the morning of the 3rd, in 2024, I ended the relationship and asked Michel ‘Mike’ Uzu to leave my apartment in Wilmington, Delaware,” his statement says. “I was ending the relationship after months of escalating mistreatment,” the statement says, adding that Uzu refused to leave his apartment and started a confrontation.
“Uzu attacked me,” the statement continues. “He struck me repeatedly with his fists, with my own cell phone, and with a titanium lacrosse stick that he picked up from inside the apartment and used to strike me on the head. I suffered severe facial trauma, swelling, bodily bruising, and required surgical staples to close the lacerations on the top of my skull.”
The statement adds, “During the assault, Uzu told me he would kill me if I told anyone. Outside the apartment building, Uzu picked up a large rock and positioned himself to strike me with it before a bystander intervened.” It says Moyer was then transported to the emergency room of a nearby hospital.
Moyer’s lawsuit says Uzu was arrested by Wilmington police, indicted by a grand jury, and arraigned on felony and misdemeanor assault charges.
In response to an email request from the Blade for comment, Uzu emailed a statement on Sept. 15 denying all of Moyer’s allegations, saying it was he who told Moyer he wanted to end their relationship and it was Moyer who assaulted him.
“He would get drunk and use drugs and pick up fights with me and apologize when he became normal,” Uzu says in his statement. “So, I packed up my things and decided to depart from him,” he said, adding, “The night preceding the day I was moving out he attacked me while I was sleeping, kicked me in the stomach and injured me in my arms, jaw and neck while I was sleeping, that turned into a fight as I was defending myself.”
He said he called the police and before the police arrived Moyer “self-inflicted injury on himself and framed it on me.”
Moyer couldn’t immediately be reached for a response to Uzu’s allegations. But his friend, journalist Scott Davis, who has followed the case and examined the police report and court documents, said none of Uzu’s allegations could be confirmed by police, who arrived on the scene and prepared a report. Among other things, Davis said the investigation conducted by the University of Delaware found Uzu never provided any documentation that he was injured.
Davis said Moyer, who is about 5 feet 7 inches tall and weighs about 160 pounds compared to Uzu, who is over six feet tall and weighed over 200 pounds, was the one found to be suffering serious injuries, with no injuries reported for Uzu.
Moyer’s earlier statement to the Blade says that In September 2024, on the day of his birthday, the lead prosecutor in the case, Deputy Attorney General Claudia Debonte, called him to inform him she was dropping the case. The lawsuit states that the reason given for dropping the case was insufficient evidence based on Uzu’s claim that he acted in self-defense.
“The University’s hearing officer explicitly rejected Uzu’s self-defense claims as ‘inconsistent and unreliable’ and found that Uzu’s account contained ‘multiple irreconcilable inconsistencies’ and ‘material omissions,’” Moyer’s lawsuit states.
Moyer’s lawsuit says the university’s investigative findings and the police report at the time Uzu was arrested, along with a partial video Moyer took with his phone showing Uzu attacking him with the lacrosse stick, clearly provide sufficient evidence for a full prosecution.
Moyer has said the assault left him with permanent brain damage that impaired his vision, forcing him to resign from his career as a financial compliance associate with the BlackRock asset management company.
In response to a request by the Blade for comment on why the Delaware Attorney General’s office, with the approval of Attorney General Jennings, declined to prosecute Uzu for assault, Matt Marshall, a spokesperson for Jennings, sent the Blade a statement.
“While I can’t characterize specific evidence or statements made to police, the State’s analysis included, but was not limited to, the investigation’s finding that the Defendant had a credible claim of self-defense,” according to Marshall’s statement.
“This kind of dynamic is fairly common in domestic violence cases, no less so in same-sex cases,” he said. “A case being unviable at trial does not mean a victim has not been harmed, that we don’t believe them, or even necessarily that a Defendant is innocent,” Marshall’s statement says. “It only means that criminal guilt could not be proven at trial.”
Among other things, he noted that prosecutors must be able to convince a jury that a defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case, he said, his office did not believe they could overcome “every reasonable doubt, which would include a Defendant’s argument that they acted in self-defense.”
Jennings, a Democrat, who easily won her primary race for re-election to a third four-year term on Tuesday, has a longstanding record of support on LGBTQ rights and progressive causes. She was challenged by two opponents in the Sept. 15, 2026, Delaware Democratic primary. One of the opponents, civil rights attorney Dwayne Bensing, is gay and would have become the nation’s first openly gay state attorney general had he prevailed in the race.
In response to a request from the Blade for comment on Moyer’s lawsuit allegations, Bensing said in a statement that when the Attorney General’s office declines to prosecute a case where an arrest was made it should maintain the public trust by being “transparent” about its decision-making process.
“As Attorney General, I will commit to reviewing how domestic partner violence cases are handled across the state to ensure that prosecutorial decisions are made consistently, transparently, and free from administrative oversight failures,” he said.
Moyer’s lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware on April 16, 2026, calls for a jury trial and requests that the court issue a judgment against each of the defendants, “jointly and severally” finding that they “conspired to deprive Plaintiff of the equal protection of the laws in violation of 42 U.S. Code 1985 (3).”
It calls for compensatory damages and punitive damages against each defendant “in an amount to be determined at trial, including damages for lost wages, medical expenses, legal fees, emotional distress, and pain and suffering.”
Moyer said he is currently representing himself without an attorney.
In an Aug. 28, 2026, “Report and Recommendation,” Magistrate Judge Laura D. Hatcher, who was presiding over the lawsuit case, issued a recommendation that the case be dismissed without prejudice on grounds that Moyer’s complaint “fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted” based on existing federal law.
Hatcher also recommended that Moyer be “granted leave to amend his complaint within thirty (30) days of the District Court’s adoption of this Report and Recommendation.”
Moyer told the Blade District Judge Gregory B. Williams accepted the recommendation and granted him permission to amend and revise his complaint.
“An amended complaint addressing the Court’s guidance will be filed within the timeframe the Court has provided,” Moyer said. “The Court identified areas where the complaint needed further development, and that development is underway,” he said.
Moyer’s friend, journalist and commentator Davis, said he has conducted research into domestic violence cases in Delaware and reported in articles and commentaries that Delaware is one of the states with the highest rates of domestic violence cases that are not prosecuted.
“In fiscal year 2024, Delaware law enforcement made 5,064 domestic violence arrests,” Davis wrote in a November 2025 commentary entitled, “Was Ty Moyer Too Black and Gay for Delaware AG Kathy Jennings to Prosecute His Attacker?” He added, “Yet Jennings’ office prosecuted only 1,184 cases – a mere 23 percent,” Davis wrote, adding that, “More than three-quarters of domestic violence perpetrators faced no prosecution despite being arrested.”
Davis told the Blade that Jennings’s decision not to prosecute Uzu has raised concerns that she based that decision on political bias. He points out that Jennings has publicly aligned herself with national immigration advocacy efforts, including joining lawsuits against the Trump administration’s immigration policies and its funding freezes against universities, including the University of Delaware.
Davis said Uzu’s academic ties to the University of Delaware and the chemical company Chemours, which Davis says is “politically influential” with its headquarters in Wilmington, has led some to believe that Jennings’s refusal to prosecute Uzu was politically motivated, aimed at preserving her image as a defender of immigrants rather than pursuing justice for a domestic violence victim.
Jennings’s supporters dispute those claims, saying she bases her decisions on whom to prosecute on the available evidence.
As if all that were not enough, Davis said he contacted the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in September 2025 to find out if their strict policy of investigating and deporting immigrants found to have violated U.S. laws, including engaging in violent behavior, might apply to Michael Uzu, who was charged with assault and is in the U.S. on a visa status. Davis said the DHS did not respond to his inquiry.
Virginia
Virginia Anti-Violence Project struggles to fill federal funding gaps
Group has lost 54 percent of funding since 2020
A loss of federal funding has threatened to adversely impact the Virginia Anti-Violence Project’s work in the state.
The group’s mission is to assist LGBTQ and BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and people of color) victims of domestic, sexual, interpersonal, and state violence with direct support, education, and advocacy. The VAVP seeks to build a future where LGBTQ and BIPOC individuals can live freely without a sense for worry about violence.
“Virginia Anti-Violence Project helps to close the distance between services existing and LGBTQIA+ survivors actually being able to reach safety, stable housing, and support that they can trust,” VAVP Executive Director Ebony Clark told the Washington Blade on Tuesday. “Our mission is to provide direct services and advocacy to LGBTQ+ survivors across Virginia.”
Clark said obtaining state and federal funds has become increasingly difficult.
“One of the reasons that we can talk about is politics and how you know queer diverse, queer communities are targets when it comes to politics, and so that may be a reason why the funding is decreasing in in very niche areas, but overall, state funding, federal funding has been lost or significantly reduced when it comes to culturally specific marginalized populations,” Clark said. “The bigger picture is that funding that was purposed for diversity, equity, inclusion, marginalized populations, or you know culturally competent programming, those funds have been strategically reduced or eliminated on state and federal levels overall.”
Even more so with the current Trump-Vance administration.
Data shows federal funding for one “major federal victim-services funding stream in” Virginia has dropped 54 percent over the last six years: from $25.1 million in fiscal year 2020 to $11.6 million in fiscal year 2026.
Clark noted some federal funding has been denied due to VAVP’s DEI policies — it has had to “water down” their language. These cuts have forced VAVP to limit housing and economic support, which has resulted in fewer resources for its clients.
The organization has set up a goal for receiving between $250,000-$300,000 a year that would allow it to operate — and focus on client housing.
“Housing is fundamental to safety,” Clark told the Blade. “If you know leaving violence puts someone on the street or forces them back to the person harming them, that means the crisis isn’t over. So there needs to be other prevention strategies and reactive strategies in place to be able to prevent further violence from folks.”
VAVP has set up a link for anyone who is interested in making a donation. It is here.
The VAVP website is also accepting donations.
District of Columbia
Hands Off the Arts to form ‘human chain’ around Kennedy Center
Drag performer Tara Hoot among event organizers
An organization called Hands Off the Arts has announced it is holding a protest on Friday, Sept. 18, in which between 400 and 800 participants are expected to create a “human chain” around the Kennedy Center to voice their strong objection to President Donald Trump’s call for possibly demolishing the Kennedy Center.
“Hands Off the Arts is organizing a rally Sept. 18 against the president’s defacing of JFK’s memorial, his removal and censorship of art, and the threat to demolish the center if he can’t remake the site in his image,” a statement released by the group says.
The statement says the event will start with a rally at 6:30 p.m. on the Kennedy Center steps and culminate with a “human chain” around the building. “There will be musical performances, testimonials from current and former employees, along with other special guest speakers,” it says
A separate announcement by the group says longtime D.C. drag performer Tara Hoot, who has performed at the Kennedy Center in past years, was among the organizers of the Sept. 18 protest.
The planned protest follows Trump’s decision last year to use his authority to replace the existing members of the Kennedy Center’s board of directors with new members loyal to him. Over the objection of longtime Kennedy Center supporters, the Trump-appointed board changed the name of the center, at Trump’s request, from the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts to the Donald J. Trump and the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.
But following the threat of legal action by opponents who pointed out that the name change could not be legally made unless approved by Congress, the name change was cancelled, with Trump saying he would take steps to restore it later.
The Washington Post, meanwhile, reports in a Sept. 13 news story that because of negative publicity related to Trump’s actions, the Kennedy Center was facing “fiscal collapse” and possible bankruptcy and could be forced to shut down as early as this week.
According to the Post report, a 57-page document presented to the Kennedy Center’s board of trustees says the center was facing a financial and structural building crisis, with the recent collapse of part of the building’s inside ceiling, indicating the building was unsafe for employees and the public. Among other things, the document says the Kennedy Center may not be able to make payroll or pay for routine maintenance “within a matter of weeks,” the Post reports.
Some LGBTQ advocates were among those who joined others in boycotting the Kennedy Center to express their objections to Trump’s actions, including a statement by Trump that he objected to the Kennedy Center’s practice of hosting drag performances.
The Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington has been among the LGBTQ performing arts groups and artists that have performed at the Kennedy Center.
“With the future still very much uncertain, now more than ever, the Center needs you to stand up for freedom of expression and against authoritarian overreach into arts and culture institutions,” the Hands Off the Arts group says in its announcement of the Hands Around the Kennedy Center protest.
“You have the opportunity to make a difference — show up with Hands Off the Arts and show your power as part of Hands Around the Kennedy Center,” it says.
A spokesperson for the Kennedy Center couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.
Jeremy Moss looks to bring LGBTQ advocacy from Lansing to Capitol Hill
Parties, dinners, concerts and more on tap for fall nightlife
All the queer things to watch this fall
Gun reform is an LGBTQ rights issue
Trump’s Cabinet: Dumb, dumber, dumbest, and evil
Dolly Parton biography puts her hardships into context
PHOTOS: SMYAL Fall Brunch
Fashion icon Bob Mackie dead at 87
Transgender woman killed in Barclay community mourned by friends, advocates
